There is a singular overriding focused message that those who oppose the movement refuse to pay attention to but is CLEARLY THERE AND HAS BEEN FROM THE START:

[bGet
money
out
of
politics[/size]

Stop spreading the bullshit right-wing narrative propaganda that there is no unifying message. There is. That's what it is. Ask anyone involved in the movement.

That's not the unifying message at all. There are many messages I've seen, and this is but one of them. And it's a stupid one at that. You'll never get the money out of politics. That's why the best course of action on political donations is just to have full disclosure. If NBC wants to donate $50 million to Obama, let them "have at it." Just make sure we know. If Nabisco wants to give $1,000,000 to Senator Cookie Monster's campaign, fine. I just want to know about it.

On another note, I'd like to point out your tendency to discount differing opinions in wholesale fashion. For example, it's not just that you disagree re: lack of a unifying message. No, no! You have to call that opinion "bullsh** right wing propaganda." You can't simply debate on the merits. You must utterly disqualify differing opinions because they are not yours.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

I spent half an hour in a tent. Things were apparently at a high pitch, but they were strong.

I plan on donating all the profits from the picture to their cause.

This speaks exactly to what the left considers to be action. I spent half an hour in a tent, I took a picture, someone should give me a lot of money for that picture and I'll give you some of that money. In the meantime let's all discuss how the people who really have to make everything are assholes and why they should slave away for us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmac

It's almost a sure bet they won't be supporting the republicans next year.

Does it matter who they support? They are broke and living in parks. They might not be able to even register if they don't return to their home addresses and don't have a new address besides "hey, I occupy space."

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

There is a singular overriding focused message that those who oppose the movement refuse to pay attention to but is CLEARLY THERE AND HAS BEEN FROM THE START:
Get money out of politics!

Stop spreading the bullshit right-wing narrative propaganda that there is no unifying message. There is. That's what it is. Ask anyone involved in the movement.

Money out of politics doesn't even fit will into the messaging of "We are the 99%." Stop putting people down because you got your new DailyKos talking points today and all us didn't agree with them or are not on the mailing list. (Actually I am which is why I am aware of such things.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazzguru

It should be the other way around: get politics out of money.

BINGO!

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001

That's not the unifying message at all. There are many messages I've seen, and this is but one of them. And it's a stupid one at that. You'll never get the money out of politics. That's why the best course of action on political donations is just to have full disclosure. If NBC wants to donate $50 million to Obama, let them "have at it." Just make sure we know. If Nabisco wants to give $1,000,000 to Senator Cookie Monster's campaign, fine. I just want to know about it.

On another note, I'd like to point out your tendency to discount differing opinions in wholesale fashion. For example, it's not just that you disagree re: lack of a unifying message. No, no! You have to call that opinion "bullsh** right wing propaganda." You can't simply debate on the merits. You must utterly disqualify differing opinions because they are not yours.

Exactly, full disclosure is the key to knowing who is giving what to whom. This is especially true when Democrats take foreign donations, have bundlers going to jail, etc. It doesn't matter what the issue, he doesn't engage it, he simply declares the other party unfit and he is the winner in a vacuum. Too bad the vacuum is only within his own mind and his rage increases any time people don't accede to his demand that we all quit and simply declare him the winner by default.

So let me get this straight...you ADMIT that Occupy is unfocused, with no clear nor practical message..you just think "there's a lot o' crap to complain about?" And you're giving money to these people, whoever they are? Wow.

There you go again. There is little to nothing at present or in the recent past that supports your prediction. As usual.

Quote:

There you go again. There is little to nothing at present or in the recent past that supports your prediction. As usual

You wish! Who do you think they're angry at in government. I'd be willing to bet it's not Obama.

And yes I know you ignore polls that don't reflect what you want to happen. Also I'm thinking come election time the republicans will being paying the piper for not learning to say " Yes " instead of " No " all of the time.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

That's not the unifying message at all. There are many messages I've seen, and this is but one of them. And it's a stupid one at that. You'll never get the money out of politics. That's why the best course of action on political donations is just to have full disclosure. If NBC wants to donate $50 million to Obama, let them "have at it." Just make sure we know. If Nabisco wants to give $1,000,000 to Senator Cookie Monster's campaign, fine. I just want to know about it.

On another note, I'd like to point out your tendency to discount differing opinions in wholesale fashion. For example, it's not just that you disagree re: lack of a unifying message. No, no! You have to call that opinion "bullsh** right wing propaganda." You can't simply debate on the merits. You must utterly disqualify differing opinions because they are not yours.

You talk about others being dismissive and yet in your first paragraph you both dismiss my point and say the message in itself is stupid. You are a walking contradiction.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

Exactly, full disclosure is the key to knowing who is giving what to whom. This is especially true when Democrats take foreign donations, have bundlers going to jail, etc. It doesn't matter what the issue, he doesn't engage it, he simply declares the other party unfit and he is the winner in a vacuum. Too bad the vacuum is only within his own mind and his rage increases any time people don't accede to his demand that we all quit and simply declare him the winner by default.

You've got it completely backasswards. Full disclosure is the opposite of what we need to do. What we need to do is to prohibit any disclosure. Make all political donations anonymous, with the anonymity especially strict between donor and recipient. Make it a felony to disclose the source of a donation. This is the only way we can end the 'tit for tat' culture of corruption.

Does it matter who they support? They are broke and living in parks. They might not be able to even register if they don't return to their home addresses and don't have a new address besides "hey, I occupy space."

And there you have it. The conservative mindset.

Who cares about them? They don't matter. They're poor. Fuck them. I don't care about them. They are all filthy and lazy. Don't give them health care on my dollar. Don't give them any favors on my fucking dollar. Yeah. Jesus hates them because they are lazy and steal my tax money to pay for their laziness.

Who cares about them? They don't matter. They're poor. Fuck them. I don't care about them. They are all filthy and lazy. Don't give them health care on my dollar. Don't give them any favors on my fucking dollar. Yeah. Jesus hates them because they are lazy and steal my tax money to pay for their laziness.

Well done, I see that you're coming around to a more rational and clear headed way of thinking. You finally wrote something on this forum that I can pretty much agree with.

Who do you think they're angry at in government. I'd be willing to bet it's not Obama.

No kidding, I've already pointed that out a few times in this thread. Many of those protesters are Obama lovers, they voted for him, they are too dumb to realize that they themselves are responsible for their own shitty situation and they'll probably vote for him again.

Obama also has endorsed the filthy protesters and many Obamavilles have been set up in various locations. These protests are nothing but a scam to help get Obama re-elected again, because the left is getting desperate. Why do you think that the Union thugs have joined in? Those Unions are also for Obama.

No kidding, I've already pointed that out a few times in this thread. Many of those protesters are Obama lovers, they voted for him, they are too dumb to realize that they themselves are responsible for their own shitty situation and they'll probably vote for him again.

Obama also has endorsed the filthy protesters and many Obamavilles have been set up in various locations. These protests are nothing but a scam to help get Obama re-elected again, because the left is getting desperate. Why do you think that the Union thugs have joined in? Those Unions are also for Obama.

I guess Michael Savage is your mentor.These are most of his words spewing from his mixed up mouth.I presume Gingrich or the other plastic inhuman would be a better president for the states to lead us into another economic disaster.

You've got it completely backasswards. Full disclosure is the opposite of what we need to do. What we need to do is to prohibit any disclosure. Make all political donations anonymous, with the anonymity especially strict between donor and recipient. Make it a felony to disclose the source of a donation. This is the only way we can end the 'tit for tat' culture of corruption.

This is ridiculously naive. Obviously even now if someone is corrupt and wants to make a large donation for a favor they can't disclose it. They just hide it a dozen different ways. You take this corruption and institutionalize it. Hey, how do you make it a felony to disclose an act that hasn't happened yet btw? Does it become a thoughtcrime? Do you limit speech by declaring it a crime to even discuss giving a donation?

Congressman Tonton: So I see you need a few favors done. You want a tax loophole so that if you make a few wind turbines, we absolve you of your federal corporate tax.

Crony Jimmac: Sure, that'd be GE, I mean awesome. What do I need to do to make it happen?

Congressman Tonton: Well how about $2 million towards my reelection.

Crony Jimmac: Consider it done, especially since we will save billions on our tax bill.

One week later.......

Congressman Tonton: He, there's a two million more in my reelection fund at the agreed upon date and time. Did you put that there?

Who cares about them? They don't matter. They're poor. Fuck them. I don't care about them. They are all filthy and lazy. Don't give them health care on my dollar. Don't give them any favors on my fucking dollar. Yeah. Jesus hates them because they are lazy and steal my tax money to pay for their laziness.

You're so cute when you caricature and strawman a point. Jimmac was making it sound like they were some powerful political force to be feared. I noted they aren't at all that. You make it sound like that means to burn them alive or something of that nature. A few thousand people total nationwide playing homeless for "awareness" or "consciousness raising" doesn't equal voter turn out. Be pissed about it, caricature it, make accusations related to it, but that's the truth. Occupy by it's very nature is the exact opposite of taking action. It is prone and passive. It's a big party where you forget to show up for work the next morning only work is the election.

How is occupying a park going to run phone banks, hand out flyers, knock on doors, drive people to polls, send out mailers, etc.? It isn't. It is stationary, passive and demands narcissism rather than action. It screams look at me rather than making something happen.

I guess Michael Savage is your mentor.These are most of his words spewing from his mixed up mouth.I presume Gingrich or the other plastic inhuman would be a better president for the states to lead us into another economic disaster.

Gingrich was Speaker the last time we had balanced budgets. That was hardly an economic disaster. They drug Clinton kicking and screaming to balance it and even were willing to take the political hits but made it happen.

Government needs to make some judgments in spending all that money. They need to say some people need it and others don't. They need someone to say, sorry to this entire industry that has cropped up to help people place their households on SSI to replace AFDC as an example.

This is ridiculously naive. Obviously even now if someone is corrupt and wants to make a large donation for a favor they can't disclose it. They just hide it a dozen different ways. You take this corruption and institutionalize it. Hey, how do you make it a felony to disclose an act that hasn't happened yet btw? Does it become a thoughtcrime? Do you limit speech by declaring it a crime to even discuss giving a donation?

Congressman Tonton: So I see you need a few favors done. You want a tax loophole so that if you make a few wind turbines, we absolve you of your federal corporate tax.

Crony Jimmac: Sure, that'd be GE, I mean awesome. What do I need to do to make it happen?

Congressman Tonton: Well how about $2 million towards my reelection.

Crony Jimmac: Consider it done, especially since we will save billions on our tax bill.

One week later.......

Congressman Tonton: He, there's a two million more in my reelection fund at the agreed upon date and time. Did you put that there?

Yeah, saying we should nuke Iran and kill everyone without remorse isn't as bad as what I wrote. I got you. I guess you don't really pay him that much attention to know what else he's written.

Then take issue with those posts. Posting that "Hitler is his mentor" when he's arguing for personal responsibility and saying that the Occupy protests are meant to be a leftist counterbalance to the Tea Party makes you look loopy.

You shouldn't clutter a thread with references to past arguments and then expect everyone else to know what you mean.

Then take issue with those posts. Posting that "Hitler is his mentor" when he's arguing for personal responsibility and saying that the Occupy protests are meant to be a leftist counterbalance to the Tea Party makes you look loopy.

You shouldn't clutter a thread with references to past arguments and then expect everyone else to know what you mean.

There are millions of people living in poverty in the United States for other reasons than a lack of "personal responsibility". And no, voluntary charity doesn't cover for their needs, and it never will.

There are millions of people living in poverty in the United States for other reasons than a lack of "personal responsibility". And no, voluntary charity doesn't cover for their needs, and it never will.

So everyone should be forced under threat of violence to take care of those who can't (or won't) take care of themselves?

I, personally, would not feel good about accepting help from someone who was forced to give it under threat of violence.

It's called accounting. No company or individual can legally hide large changes in capital.

Yes, accounting makes it completely impossible to hide. We don't even have idioms like "cook the books" because no one has ever been able to hide anything using accounting.

Why make it large? It isn't like the don't bundle donations now. This is why it is a naive proposition and why hiding everything doesn't improve accountability.

Also think about how trusting you are here. Everyone else, everywhere else has all manner of responsibility. They can't even TALK about donations in your wonderful police state and the government has to report... NOTHING.

No possibility of corruption there right? BTW, Congressman Tonton, I'm so glad you choose me for your web hosting service. Now sure normally a service like this would be $5000 a month, but we are for some strange reason only billing you $2000 a month, and we do that over two years so.... we've given you $72k of DONATIONS. You don't have to report anything and our books show it just fine. People might look into it more but they aren't allowed to even question it on your side.

All this sort of stuff already goes on. You take half the equation and hide it. That is ridiculous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonton

By the way, you guys' argument completely falls apart when you consider that camping out and protesting is hardly the "lazy" thing to do.

Lazy is staying at home. It takes a fucking hell of a lot of effort to make it over to a protest, and then to participate. More than keeping a stable job for most folks, in fact.

These protesters are hardly "lazy".

I've camped plenty. Lot's of people camp plenty. What these folks are doing isn't work at all. They are sitting on their asses and making demands. If they wanted to protest daily and get the various permits, drive to various locations, etc. while that still wouldn't be a job, it would still be more effort than this. Lazy isn't staying home. Lazy is MOVING your home to the park so you can sit on your ass all day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonton

There are millions of people living in poverty in the United States for other reasons than a lack of "personal responsibility". And no, voluntary charity doesn't cover for their needs, and it never will.

Most of the poor are children. Obama has only added $5 trillion to their tab during his administration. The reason they are poor is because government policy discourages proper household formation to keep said voters dependent on said government. 80% of poor HOUSEHOLDS would rise above the poverty line if the parents of the children got married. There's a reason they don't and it has everything to do with qualifying for and receiving government services.

I guess Michael Savage is your mentor.These are most of his words spewing from his mixed up mouth.I presume Gingrich or the other plastic inhuman would be a better president for the states to lead us into another economic disaster.

No, not really.

I don't listen to him or anybody on the radio. I do know about him and he is an intelligent guy though, so I don't mind being compared to him. If we both came to the same conclusion about something, then that's not surprising, because I am a pretty intelligent guy too.

After getting mic checked at today's speech, Mr. President was handed a note and the AP got some AWESOME photos of him reading it.

Obama owns those protests, he is one of them. He officially supports them and everything bad that has happened at the protests so far, like rapes, murder, health hazards, assault, theft and other crimes, they're all on Obama's back. Yep, they're just like the Tea Party.

No kidding, I've already pointed that out a few times in this thread. Many of those protesters are Obama lovers, they voted for him, they are too dumb to realize that they themselves are responsible for their own shitty situation and they'll probably vote for him again.

Obama also has endorsed the filthy protesters and many Obamavilles have been set up in various locations. These protests are nothing but a scam to help get Obama re-elected again, because the left is getting desperate. Why do you think that the Union thugs have joined in? Those Unions are also for Obama.

So who do you think they're going to vote for?

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

You wish! Who do you think they're angry at in government. I'd be willing to bet it's not Obama.

I don't think that exactly. The issue I hear most about is jobs, income inequality and corporate influences on politics. The overall vibe is that they aren't pleased with Obama, but I don't see them as extremely hostile towards him, either.

Quote:

And yes I know you ignore polls that don't reflect what you want to happen. Also I'm thinking come election time the republicans will being paying the piper for not learning to say " Yes " instead of " No " all of the time.

I love how you pretend that my statement on Obama being in trouble politically is just my opinion, and just based on polling data. It's so much more than that. In fact, I challenge you to find a single political expert that thinks Obama has a better than average chance of being reelected. It's not rocket science, jimmac. Simply look at the numbers:

No President other than Reagan has been reelected with unemployment over 7%. In that situation, the economy was rapidly improving and unemployment was coming down from over 10%.

Obama is, at best, statistically tied in national polls with the presumptive GOP nominee

Obama's support among blacks has dropped by nearly 30%

Right Track/Wrong Track polling is approximately 25/75

It's the economy, stupid.

You can point to a few polls that show Obama beating candidate X, Y or Z by however many points nationally. You can point to "lean Democrat" states and various bumps for Obama here and there. But taking all of this, you tell me you feel he has a good chance at reelection? I find that hard to believe, even for you. Also, let me ask this: Anecdotally speaking, who do you know that is happy with Obama? I speak to a lot of people, listen to a lot of opinions, etc. I hear very few that support Obama much less are enthusiastic about him. Again, that's just anecdotal, but I'd be interested to hear your experiences.

It seems they have have the council "sanctiined" as he put it. In other words the o's 2 points which are banks pay before austerity and global growth is unstainable are their view too. It doesm't hurt that the O'Edinburgh movement listens and works with the best wishes of Edinburgh establishments groups, including the council, within reason.

Smelly they may appear, but stupid they are not. Indeeed a £20,000 cheque to a hippy ( he's hellbent on disproving that...lol...i've seen a few hippies in my day, and he sure looks the part!) from his it.

Lost track here. But their going to work towards teaching canvassing, to benefit the the council too. I'm slightly confused by thus. His, Chris, is goal to is to get Edinburgh trsidents in o'edinburgh side.

---Sorry for the spelling and grammar mistakes. I wrote it in a hurry earlier on my iPhone outside in the cold.

I have to say that Chris, who takes a prominent role within Occupy Edinburgh has a remarkably long term view. He seems to view the movement as a foundation rather than a hammer, so to speak. I think he's taking the easy road myself... too willing to back unions and lefties to achieve results. That's squandering the opportunity to a degree, and focuses all the attention on the so called "good" Left and "bad" Right. Personally I think that's wrong. The big issues here are for the left and the right, not just one side.

I wish them well.

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.

I don't think that exactly. The issue I hear most about is jobs, income inequality and corporate influences on politics. The overall vibe is that they aren't pleased with Obama, but I don't see them as extremely hostile towards him, either.

I love how you pretend that my statement on Obama being in trouble politically is just my opinion, and just based on polling data. It's so much more than that. In fact, I challenge you to find a single political expert that thinks Obama has a better than average chance of being reelected. It's not rocket science, jimmac. Simply look at the numbers:

No President other than Reagan has been reelected with unemployment over 7%. In that situation, the economy was rapidly improving and unemployment was coming down from over 10%.

Obama is, at best, statistically tied in national polls with the presumptive GOP nominee

Obama's support among blacks has dropped by nearly 30%

Right Track/Wrong Track polling is approximately 25/75

It's the economy, stupid.

You can point to a few polls that show Obama beating candidate X, Y or Z by however many points nationally. You can point to "lean Democrat" states and various bumps for Obama here and there. But taking all of this, you tell me you feel he has a good chance at reelection? I find that hard to believe, even for you. Also, let me ask this: Anecdotally speaking, who do you know that is happy with Obama? I speak to a lot of people, listen to a lot of opinions, etc. I hear very few that support Obama much less are enthusiastic about him. Again, that's just anecdotal, but I'd be interested to hear your experiences.

You see his supporters ( like myself ) aren't happy with what he's done. He hasn't been nearly hard enough on the Republicans or focused on the issues in the right order. However we also realize electing any of the GOP candidates would be a disaster for our country at a time we don't need another. So better Obama than one of that group. It's an easy call.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

You wish! Who do you think they're angry at in government. I'd be willing to bet it's not Obama.

And yes I know you ignore polls that don't reflect what you want to happen. Also I'm thinking come election time the republicans will being paying the piper for not learning to say " Yes " instead of " No " all of the time.

They are ruining themselves with these debates constantly and making asses out of themselves and Obama is laughing internally and seeing what is going on.